The Times Australia
The Times News

.
Beatbot

.

First Nations children are still being removed at disproportionate rates. Cultural assumptions about parenting need to change

  • Written by Jacynta Krakouer, Research Fellow, Monash University
First Nations children are still being removed at disproportionate rates. Cultural assumptions about parenting need to change

Child protection processes in Australia have a history of injustice that disproportionately targets and harms First Nations children, families and communities.

As a result, contemporary child protection systems and associated professions have sought to distance themselves from explicitly racist past policies and practices by apologising[1] for their past involvement in the Stolen Generations and committing to change.

Yet child protection systems continue to operate on assumptions about race and class[2] that increase inequalities and injustices against First Nations families.

In a Queensland study[3] published in 2018 that used data from 2010-2011, Indigeneity was found to be a greater predictor of “subsequent child protection reports and investigations than a rating of ‘high risk’ on child protection’s risk assessment tool”.

Another study in Western Australia found, when controlled for all other factors, Aboriginality was associated with almost double the risk[4] of infant removal.

Understandings of risk, child abuse and neglect are often biased in favour of white middle-class parenting practices. This can lead to over-surveillance of First Nations families, and a flawed notification system.

Read more: The government's Stolen Generations redress scheme is piecemeal and unrealistic[5]

First Nations styles of parenting are disregarded or considered unsafe

According to University of Utah academic Audrey Thompson[6], “Whiteness Theory treats whiteness not as a biological category but as a social construction.” White social constructions are often informing major decision-making in child protection practice and policies. This is because legislators and those making decisions about child protection are often white. However, families disproportionately affected by these decisions are often Indigenous.

As a result, white constructs also inform the baseline for good parenting practices in Australian child protection services. Essentially, Australian child protection systems were built around white, middle class standards[7] of parenting. This means they often ignore[8] cultural differences in how children are raised.

For example, many First Nations families raise their children collectively[9], with resources – such as food and housing – shared among family, kinship and community members.

The recent documentary The Department[10] told the story of First Nations woman Stacey and her struggles trying to get her children returned to her care.

The size of Stacey’s house was viewed by child protection services as a barrier. Stacey complied with the department’s guidelines, including moving into a larger house with four bedrooms. Despite having two of her children in her care, the film ends with three of Stacey’s children remaining in out-of-home care.

Another case was a First Nations woman who had her baby taken from her by child protection. According to The Guardian, the chief executive officer of the First Peoples’ Health and Wellbeing Clinic said the initial assessment of this mother had been culturally inappropriate[11].

This ignorance of Indigenous ways of parenting could be contributing to the 20,077 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in out-of-home care as of 30 June 2019. According to the Family Matters Report[12], this represents one in every 16.6 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children living in Australia.

First Nations children had far higher rates of substantiations for neglect (31.8%) compared to non-Indigenous children (18.2%) in 2019-20, and lower rates of substantiations for sexual abuse.

Understandings of neglect and emotional abuse are subject to interpretation[13] by child protection practitioners. These interpretations can be based on societal and cultural values often incompatible with collective child rearing, and do not account for the impacts of material poverty when raising children.

Read more: Thirteen years after 'Sorry', too many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are still being removed from their homes[14]

Families facing punishment instead of support

Currently, child protection services often punish and blame[15] individuals for their “dysfunction” or risk. Genuine support, with a focus on addressing the drivers[16] of child protection involvement, remains lacking.

For First Nations families, these drivers include poverty, housing issues, racism, trauma, mental health concerns, domestic and family violence, and alcohol and other drugs abuse.

Rather than offering support to First Nations families who are in dire circumstances – such as financial support – the response of child protection systems remains coercive, controlling, and punitive[17].

For example, reasons for emotional abuse substantiations[18] can include children witnessing[19] domestic and family violence. Rather than providing ways for victim-survivors of domestic and family violence (often women and children[20]) to stay together, child removal often occurs.

There is no focus on the structures driving these problems[21]. Instead, blame is placed on the affected individual.

As argued by Derecka Purnell[22], lawyer and author of Becoming Abolitionists[23], child protection systems in the United States are predicated on the failure of individuals to “protect” and supply their children with certain provisions. However there is limited support from these services to supply resources needed for parents to feed, clothe and house their children.

Australia’s child protection systems have the same flaws[24].

A flawed notification system

Increased involvement of child protection agencies with First Nations families contributes to a harmful perception among those who report issues to child protection (teachers, health professionals, police and the general public) that First Nations families ought to be surveilled more than others.

This becomes a vicious circle, increasing the number of reports, contributing to the overrepresentation[25] of First Nations children in child protection and out-of-home care.

Anyone in the community can make a notification of alleged child abuse or neglect to child protection authorities. The concerned neighbour, the midwife at the maternity hospital, the teacher in the classroom, or the police officer responding to a family violence call-out.

They do not need to supply substantive proof or evidence of the alleged harm. They need only have “reasonable belief[26]” of harm or potential harm. Their judgement as to what constitutes child abuse or neglect is at their discretion. The notifier can also remain anonymous to the family who are the target of the allegation.

Once a notification[27] of alleged child abuse or neglect has been made to child protection authorities, the likelihood of future allegations increases. This is because an allegation in and of itself serves as another “risk factor”[28].

Child protection authorities hold the power to investigate any allegation of child abuse or neglect made to their jurisdiction. But affected families are left with no choice but to comply[29] with child protection’s directives. These families often feel voiceless, powerless and in fear of a system that continues to remove First Nations children at disproportionate rates (despite making commitments[30] to change).

Social workers[31] have acknowledged the harms of past practices. However they remain complicit in child protection systems that continue to inflict harm against First Nations families and communities. These practices have resonance with the Stolen Generations.

Changing child protection systems requires more than apologies and acknowledgements of past harms. On-paper reforms, such as the commissioning of independent reviews into child protection systems without fully implementing the recommendations, ring hollow[32]. As a result, child protection systems continue to cause harm to another generation of First Nations children and families.

It needs to be accepted that understandings of “risk” in Australian child protection systems have been built on racial discrimination and biased understandings of “good parenting”.

Transformation of these systems requires investment in prevention and early intervention, confronting whiteness in these practices, and improving cultural awareness about different styles of parenting.

These are a vital steps in addressing the structural drivers of involvement with child protection systems.

Better support for First Nations families to stay together is needed to avoid more generations of stolen children.

References

  1. ^ apologising (www.aasw.asn.au)
  2. ^ race and class (upendmovement.org)
  3. ^ study (doi.org)
  4. ^ almost double the risk (doi.org)
  5. ^ The government's Stolen Generations redress scheme is piecemeal and unrealistic (theconversation.com)
  6. ^ academic Audrey Thompson (www.kooriweb.org)
  7. ^ white, middle class standards (onlinelibrary.wiley.com)
  8. ^ ignore (search.informit.org)
  9. ^ raise their children collectively (aifs.gov.au)
  10. ^ The Department (sharkisland.com.au)
  11. ^ culturally inappropriate (www.theguardian.com)
  12. ^ Family Matters Report (www.familymatters.org.au)
  13. ^ subject to interpretation (dx.doi.org)
  14. ^ Thirteen years after 'Sorry', too many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are still being removed from their homes (theconversation.com)
  15. ^ blame (doi.org)
  16. ^ drivers (www.familymatters.org.au)
  17. ^ coercive, controlling, and punitive (www.familyisculture.nsw.gov.au)
  18. ^ reasons for emotional abuse substantiations (aifs.gov.au)
  19. ^ witnessing (www.aic.gov.au)
  20. ^ often women and children (www.aihw.gov.au)
  21. ^ no focus on the structures driving these problems (doi.org)
  22. ^ Derecka Purnell (www.youtube.com)
  23. ^ Becoming Abolitionists (www.penguinrandomhouse.com)
  24. ^ have the same flaws (www.researchgate.net)
  25. ^ overrepresentation (www.familymatters.org.au)
  26. ^ reasonable belief (providers.dffh.vic.gov.au)
  27. ^ notification (www.familyisculture.nsw.gov.au)
  28. ^ another “risk factor” (aifs.gov.au)
  29. ^ comply (www.familyisculture.nsw.gov.au)
  30. ^ commitments (www.pc.gov.au)
  31. ^ Social workers (www.aasw.asn.au)
  32. ^ hollow (www.smh.com.au)

Read more https://theconversation.com/first-nations-children-are-still-being-removed-at-disproportionate-rates-cultural-assumptions-about-parenting-need-to-change-169090

The Times Features

LaManna at Essendon Fields is transforming into a festive wonderland

This festive season, LaManna is decking its halls with an incredible range of goodies to meet all your Christmas needs and ensure your next holiday feast is one to remember.  Wit...

'Big school ready’ before 2025

Rebecca Suseno, a mother from Croydon, NSW, shares her excitement and preparation for her daughter Chiara’s big leap into kindergarten in 2025. As a mother, there’s nothing...

ADHD medications affect children’s appetites. Here’s how to manage this

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) impacts the ability to maintain attention to tasks. Often, it also involves impulsive behaviour – saying or doing things without...

For the foodie or home chef, look no further than premium pizza oven brand, Gozney

Founder and designer, Tom Gozney, wanted to bring a different way of cooking to as many people as possible and has led a movement of unforgettable cooking experiences inspired ...

Beyond bricks and mortar: Building socially connected communities is Australia’s next big challenge

As state governments rush to deliver thousands of homes across the major capitals,1 one of the nation’s leading urban planners warns we must build transit based, mixed-use, w...

New research shows how long, hard and often you need to stretch to improve your flexibility

Can you reach down and touch your toes without bending your knees? Can you reach both arms overhead? If these sound like a struggle, you may be lacking flexibility. Flexibilit...

Times Magazine

Australians can now recycle unwanted sports balls

It’s predicted that 330 million sports balls are made worldwide each year – but where do they end up? TreadLightly launches new SPORTS BALL recycling program.[1] TreadLightly today launches its new SPORTS BALL recycling program, aimed at reduci...

Choosing the Right WordPress Hosting Provider in Australia

Introduction Australia’s thriving technological market has led to an increase in demand for trusted web hosting providers more than ever before, specifically for organizations and users who are utilizing WordPress to increase their online visibili...

Rental Car Accidents: Key Steps to Take Right After a Crash

Rental Car Accidents: Key Steps to Take Right After a Crash The Immediate Aftermath of a Rental Car Accident When the unexpected happens, and you're involved in a rental car accident, the moments immediately following the crash are crucial. S...

The Evolution of Digital Marketing: Trends and Innovations.

In the dynamic realm of digital marketing, staying ahead of the curve is imperative for businesses aiming to thrive in an increasingly competitive landscape. As we navigate through the ever-evolving digital ecosystem, it's crucial to understand the...

Give Dad the gift of good health this Father’s Day

According to Glenn Cross, chairman of EZZ Life Science, while Father’s Day usually triggers a frenzy of retail shopping among families desperate to buy gifts for dad to spoil him on his special day, there are many other things that families can d...

Racer Holly Espray hits the track with Uniden for V8 SuperUte Series in Bathurst

Leading SuperUte racer Holly Espray is geared up for her next big challenge at Bathurst, and she's relying on support from her new sponsor Uniden, known for its cutting-edge technology, to keep her connected and secure, both on and off the track. ...

LayBy Shopping